The High Court · 2025

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad, Through S.F.O., p.S. Ameenpur, Sangareddy. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 480 & 483 of B.N.S.S. 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in Crime No. 177 ol 2025 of. P.S. Ameenpur, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Sangareddy, This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri GURRAM VENKAT RAMANA, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Syed yasar Mamoon , Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following ORDER: - THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJ ANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9536 of 2O2,! ORDER: The present Criminal Petition is hled prayirt I lhis Court to enlarge the petitioner who is arrayed as accr.l red No.2 in Crime No.177 of 2025 before Ameenpur Police Sta ,ion, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at I iangareddy, registered for the offences punishable under Se :tions 1 03, 23a,24O,49 read with 61(2) of BNS, on bai1.

2. The brief facts of the case of prosecution lre that on 2a O3-2O25 at approximately 06:OO hours, Sri Avr. irrchinthala Keshavulu (r! Chenna Keshavulu, aged 48 years, \ 'orking as a \.ater tanker driver and resident of Maruthi Na 3ar Colony, Becramguda, Ameenpur Town Mandal, ori'1 naliy from Medakpalli Village, Thalakondapally Mandal, Rangareddy District, lodged a complaint at Ameenpur Pc,l ce Station, stating that he is one of seven siblings (six brot r :rs and one sister), and his third elder brother, Sri Art irichin thala Chcnnaiah, aged 50 years, also a water tanke- drivcr, had been residing with his wife Lavanya @ Rajitha arLr their three 2 1 \, \ children, Sai Krishna (12), Madhupriya (10), and Goutham (8) in a rented house at Raghavendra Nagar Colony, Beeramguda for the past three years. Lavanya works as a teacher in a private school. The complainant reported that the couple had a harmonious marital relationship with no known disputes. On the night of 27 O3-2O25, the family had dinner around 21:O0 hours; Lavanya and the children consumed pasta (cooked earlier that day) and curd rice, while Chennaiah ate dal rice. At around 22:00 hours, Chennaiah left for work in Chandanagar for water supply duties and returned home at approximately 23:3O hours. Upon his return, he found Lavanya and daughter Madhupriya asleep in the hall, whiie the other two children were sleeping in [he bedroom. He also slept in the hall. At around 03:30 hours on 28-03 2025, Chennaiah noticed Lavanya struggling.with severe throat pain and suffocation. With the help of neighbors, he rushed her to Panacea Hospital in Beeramguda. Meanwhile, the three children were found unresponsive at home with white foam coming out of their mouths, indicating possible poisoning or toxic reaction. Upon receiving this information, the complainant and his wife Shirisha immediately visited the house and conhrmed the children's deaths Lavanya was 3 admitted to the hospital and recovering. On receiPt of the registercd against the accused' was in stable conditi' n and said comPlaint, crir Ie was including the Petili'r rer' [or the offences as alleged' Heard Sri Gurram Venkat Ramana' leamed ccr nsel for learned l.r ditional and Sri SYed Yasar Mamoon' .) pctitloner, PublicProsecutorappearingonbehalfofrespondent'State Leamed counsel for the petitioner submr t ed that 4 . peti tioner / Accused No 2 was not present at the scent of crime on thc alleged date of incident and has no cot'trl ction or involvement with Accused No' 1 or the alleged acts F e further submitted that the only reference to the petitioll:r in the Remand Case Diary is a statement that "Shiva al ;o agreed with her and told her to quickly hnish the task"' r'i Lich lacks evidence such as call recordings or other corrobora ng He contended that the Prosecutlor has failed produce erny direct or substantrve evidence r lainst the unsubstar liated He petitioner, and the allegations remaln lamented that the actions of Accused No 1 were rr dependent andmotivatedbyherownintent,withthepetiti.lermerely material Proof 4 being a passive recipient of her statements. He averred that the petitioner was arrested on O2-O4-2O25 and has been in judicial custody for over 120 days, despite the completion of investigation and filing of the charge sheet, making continued detention unwarranted. Therefore, he prayed this Court to allow this Criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional public prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. Having regard to the rival submissions made, ancl on going through the material placed on record, it is noted rhat the allegations against the petitioner/Accused No.2, though primarily based on statements recorded during investigation, pertain to a grave and disturbing incident involving the unnatural deaths of three minor children and the attempted harm to their mother. The nature of the offence, as registered under Sections lO3, 238, 24O, 49 read with 61(2) of BNS, reflects serious charges that attract stringent penal l: I i I I 5 consequences, therefore, this court is of the hrm I t:w that this cnminal petition lacks merit and the same is lirt >le to be dism issed.

7. Accordingll-, this Criminal Petition is dismissec Miscellane ous :rpplications, if any pending, slL ll stand closcd SD/. -.VIJAYA LAXMI ASISS'IJ.NT REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPY// S: :TION OFFICER To,

1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Sangareddy, Sangarec Jy District. 2. The Station House Officer , Ameenpur Police Station, Sang r eddy District 3. The Superintendent , Central Prison, Sangareddy, Sangart ldy Dist. 4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of --, langana at Hyderabad. (OUT) 5 One CC to SRl. GURRAM VENKAT RAIVIANA, Advocate [O 6. Two CD Copies ,UC] kul/PSL \qr \ HIGH COURT DATED:21t0812025 ORDER CRL.PETITION No.9536 ol 2025 i- ilg I.:; ,ifi DISMISSING THIJ CIi I,.I't]'III'ION C.O ^ \4.-.-. 'av'